I don't remember there being a ban against it. In 2e at least I think Gods needed at least Essence 4 or something? Maybe go with that if you're talking 2e. In 3e I'd imagine there are even less restrictions.
Yes, IIRC there was even one that made a living by teaching others the style they had learned.
There's no Celestial/Terrestrial MA split. Just Martial Arts, and Sidereal Martial Arts. First Circle Demons would be limited by the Terrestrial keyword providing certain nerfs. Second Circle Demons would not have the Terrestrial Keyword nerfing the Charms. Martial Art focused Third Circles may or may not have Mastery for Styles that resonate with them, giving them powerful buffs to various Charms. Mara has Mastery on Black Claw, but the book notes that she's an exception, not an example, even among the strongest spirits.
...What's the question?
Dipping Swallow Defense means you parry really fast and well. Fivefold Bulwark Stance means you parry really fast and well all the time without much effort. Everything else is weird non-canon fluff but if you like it for your game more power to you.
Nnnno, Solars do have a shade of that in their thematics. It's generally the reasoning behind Wyld-Shaping Technique, for example; Solars are called the Lawgivers for a reason. They do have an edge of the god-king who commands the heavens and the earth. You have to be careful with that element lest it hog the spotlight, but it's there.
Yeah, it's just not in Melee, is the main thing. You find it in Lore and Integrity mostly. Little bit in Occult. Melee is pretty much just being the best thing around because you're the best. Your bestestness makes you bestesterer, if you will.
I mean, Wyld-Shaping Technique and Chaos-Repelling Pattern seem to make it clear that Solars' ability to do that is mostly limited to ordering around inanimate matter and Wyld gooblies. Being able to tell your chamber pot to fuck off with reality-warping but not your butler seems like an appropriate level of restraint.
Its more of "My skill shines through all impediments"
Yeah, I've been thinking of stuff, like, how to think of guides to make charms.
The first step is actually playing Exalted, and learning its system in practice, and then homebrewing, once you know how things work in play.
Then you're not likely to produce good homebrew. Like...sorry, but playing the game is kind of a prerequisite to knowing what works in play and how powers play out. You can't write a Charm guide unless you know how mechanics actually work, and you're not gonna have a feel for the mechanics without playing the system.
Nah. The system isn't that complex.
Yeah, but I wouldn't recommend writing a homebrew guide for any system you don't have a feel for, even simpler ones than this.
I would advise against writing a How To guide for Fate without having played Fate and seen how your players handle your ideas.
I mean... I wouldn't, but I also don't think that analogy holds, because Fate is by its nature a significantly squishier system than Exalted, at once a lot more mechanically simplistic, but also a lot more open to wiggleroom and interpretation. Fate's mechanics lean towards a discussion of whether and how you can invoke Aspects, while Exalted is much more a mathematical equation of this many dice against that difficulty with those modifiers. Not entirely, of course, but the point is that while I disagree that playing a game is necessary to, as @ManusDomini puts it, have a feel for the system, Fate lends itself better to understanding it through experience rather than examination, due to the nature of its mechanics.
The pure math can be misleading, though. See: the initiative pinata assumption tons of people had which in play gets you dead pretty fast because combat is way more swingy than it first appears. Some people might pull it off, but some people are polymaths and Olympic athletes too. Doesn't change the advice that before you decide to write a paper on how to get in shape, instead of reading up on how to get in shape, you should actually see what getting in shape feels like yourself.
Yeah, but that that just means people did bad theorycrafting; the people were at fault, not the method. Tons of people kept turning up in 2e to say that Paranoia Combat wasn't a problem because they hadn't run into lethality, that doesn't mean their experience was all that useful to the discussion.
